Nature of Confidentiality in Information The appellant plaintiff company had employed the defendant as sales manager. The contract of employment made no provision restricting use of confidential information. He left to set up in competition. The company now sought to prevent him using confidential information for this purpose. Held: The information and the advantage flowing … Continue reading Faccenda Chicken Ltd v Fowler: CA 1986
The claimant telecoms companies objected to a proposed scheme for future licensing of available spectrum. The scheme anticipated a bias in favour of auctioniung such content. It was not agreed whether any challenge to the decision should be by way of appeal to the Competition Appeal Tribunal or by judicial review. The CAT had declined … Continue reading T-Mobile (Uk) Ltd. and Another v Office of Communications: CA 12 Dec 2008
The House was asked whether an action for unlawful means conspiracy was available against a participant in a missing trader intra-community, or carousel, fraud. The company appealed a finding of liability saying that the VAT Act and Regulations contained the entire regime. Held: Criminal conduct at common law or by statute can constitute unlawful means … Continue reading Total Network Sl v Revenue and Customs: HL 12 Mar 2008
When a licence is really a tenancy The document signed by the occupier stated that she understood that she had been given a licence, and that she understood that she had not been granted a tenancy protected under the Rent Acts. Exclusive occupation was in fact granted. Held: This was a tenancy not a licence. … Continue reading Street v Mountford: HL 6 Mar 1985
Proper Reply Opportunity Required on Deportation (Grand Chamber) The claimant was an Indian citizen who had been granted indefinite leave to remain in this country but whose activities as a Sikh separatist brought him to the notice of the authorities both in India and here. The Home Secretary of the day decided that he should … Continue reading Chahal v The United Kingdom: ECHR 15 Nov 1996
The applicant pharmaceutical companies challenged the decision of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) to to list certain drugs saying that the procedure adopted was unfair. NICE had revealed that results of calculations it had made in order to assess the appropriatenmess of the use of certain drugs, but had not disclosed the mathematical … Continue reading Eisai Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) and Shire Pharmaceuticals Limited and Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (Interveners): CA 1 May 2008
(Grand Chamber) The applicants complained that on being arrested on suspicion of offences, samples of their DNA had been taken, but then despite being released without conviction, the samples had retained on the Police database. Held: (Unanimous) The retention was unlawful. Though other member states retained some DNA samples in certain conditions, the UK was … Continue reading Marper v United Kingdom; S v United Kingdom: ECHR 4 Dec 2008
The employer was to make 530 members of its staff redundant. Each staff member was assessed and scored. The claimants said that the method of selection was unfair, and sought disclosure of the scores of all employees. Held: It was wrong to order discovery of the forms of employees who had not been selected for … Continue reading British Aerospace plc v Green and Others: CA 18 Apr 1995
The claimant had been dismissed after it was discovered he had been cautioned for a public homosexual act. He appealed dismissal of his claim saying that the standard of fairness applied was inappropriate with regard to the Human Rights Act, and that the state had a duty to protect him from private acts which breached … Continue reading X v Y (Employment: Sex Offender): CA 28 May 2004
The appellants said that the 2004 Act infringed their rights under articles 8 11 and 14 and Art 1 of protocol 1. Held: Article 8 protected the right to private and family life. Its purpose was to protect individuals from unjustified intrusion by state agents into the private sphere within which they expected to be … Continue reading Countryside Alliance and others, Regina (on the Application of) v Attorney General and Another: HL 28 Nov 2007
The claimant appealed against refusal of his challenge to the new constitutional law for Sark, and sought a declaration of incompatibility under the 1998 Act. He said that by restricting the people who could stand for election, a free democracy had been denied to them, and that the constitution did not achieve a sufficient separation … Continue reading Barclay and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and others: CA 2 Dec 2008
The company decided to make redundancies. The applicants, all selected, had worked in more than one section of the plant. All employees worked under the same contract, but employees were chosen only from the one section. The complainants said that the entire workforce should have been considered. Held: Under the Order it was for the … Continue reading Murray and Another v Foyle Meats Ltd (Northern Ireland): HL 8 Jul 1999
king_rbceEAT2011 EAT UNFAIR DISMISSALReinstatement/re-engagementCompensationSEX DISCRIMINATIONAppeal allowed in part. The Employment Tribunal erred in law:(1) In failing to apply section 112 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 and in particular in failing to consider re-engagement;(2) In its approach to compensation, in effect considering only vacancies at the time of the Claimant’s peremptory dismissal and not vacancies … Continue reading King v Royal Bank of Canada Europe Ltd: EAT 18 Oct 2011
nambalatEAT2011 EAT National Minimum Wage Act 1998National Minimum Wage Regulations 1999, Reg. 2(2)Unauthorised deductions from wagesAll three Claimants were foreign domestic workers employed in the Respondents’ households. The EAT held that the work done by each of the three Claimants for their respective employers was work to which regulation 2(2) of the National Minimum Wage … Continue reading Nambalat v Taher and Another: EAT 8 Dec 2011
Members of the tribunal must not simply consider whether they personally think that the dismissal is fair and they must not substitute their decision as to what was the right course to adopt for that of the employer. Their proper function is to determine whether the decision to dismiss the employee fell within the band … Continue reading Iceland Frozen Foods Ltd v Jones: EAT 29 Jul 1982
Former employees had obtained a protective award against the company for failing to consult on the impending redundancies and submitted proofs of debt to the liquidator who sought guidance from the court. The judge had held that since the Act provided only one remedy, the protective awards were not provable. Held: The appeal was allowed. … Continue reading Haine v Secretary of State for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform and Another; Day v Haine: CA 11 Jun 2008
No General Liability in Tort for Wrongful Acts The plaintiff had previously constructed an oil supply pipeline from Beira to Mozambique. After Rhodesia declared unilateral independence, it became a criminal offence to supply to Rhodesia without a licence. The plaintiff ceased supply as required, but complained that the defendants had continued to make supplies by … Continue reading Lonrho Ltd v Shell Petroleum Co Ltd (No 2): HL 1 Apr 1981
EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS: Working outside the jurisdiction Jurisdiction in unfair dismissal. The Claimant was employed by the respondents, a UK company in the business of providing tools, services and personnel to the oil industry. He worked in Libya, on operations which were part of the business of an associated German company. He was dismissed and … Continue reading Halliburton Manufacturing and Services Ltd v Ravat: EAT 22 Oct 2008
Burchell case remains good law The appellant head teacher had been dismissed for failing to disclose the fact that her partner had been convicted of a sex offence. She now appealed from rejection of her claim for unfair dismissal. Held: The appeal was dismissed. The tribunal was entitled to conclude that it was a reasonable … Continue reading Reilly v Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council: SC 14 Mar 2018
Notice of dismissal begins when received by worker The court was asked: ‘If an employee is dismissed on written notice posted to his home address, when does the notice period begin to run? Is it when the letter would have been delivered in the ordinary course of post? Or when it was in fact delivered … Continue reading Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v Haywood: SC 25 Apr 2018
Right to be Forgotten is not absolute The two claimants separately had criminal convictions from years before. They objected to the defendant indexing third party web pages which included personal data in the form of information about those convictions, which were now spent. The claims were in Data Protection and the common law tort of … Continue reading NT 1 and NT 2 v Google Llc: QBD 13 Apr 2018
Contractor and Client Copyrights The plaintiff had contributed a design for a system of classifying and selecting tracks to be played on a radio station. He did so under a consultancy contract. Held: A Joint authorship claim required that the contributor had made some direct contribution to the words appearing in the eventual published item. … Continue reading Robin Ray v Classic FM Plc: PatC 18 Mar 1998
renton_cantorEAT2012 EAT UNFAIR DISMISSALUNLAWFUL DEDUCTION FROM WAGESVICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – WhistleblowingIn this case the claim that the dismissal was due to a protected disclosure failed but the Claimant succeeded in his claim for unfair dismissal under section 98 and 98A of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The Appellant’s argument as to the adequacy of the reasons … Continue reading Renton v Cantor Fitzgerald Europe: EAT 18 Jul 2012
The employers were a well known roofing and tiling firm, Marley Tiles . The employer sought to impose post employment restrictions including a restriction on canvassing soliciting or dealing with customers in the whole of Devon and Cornwall. Within that area the plaintiffs had 2,500 customers. The covenant against soliciting was also a covenant against … Continue reading Marley Tile Co Ltd v Shaw: CA 1980
The claimant challenged the respondent’s decision to order the return of herself and her son to Lebanon. Held: The test for whether a claimant’s rights would be infringed to such an extent as to prevent their return home was a strict one, but in this case, the appeal was allowed, and the decision quashed. The … Continue reading EM (Lebanon) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 22 Oct 2008
Employment Tribunals to Provide Sufficient Reasons Tribunals, when giving their decisions, are required to do no more than to make clear their findings of fact and to answer any question of law raised. Bingham LJ said: ‘It has on a number of occasions been made plain that the decision of an Industrial Tribunal is not … Continue reading Meek v City of Birmingham District Council: CA 18 Feb 1987
The respondent was employed by the appellant. He was resident in GB, and was based here, but much work was overseas. At the time of his dismissal he was working in Libya. The company denied that UK law applied. He alleged unfair dismissal. Held: The company’s appeal failed. The details that he was dismissed by … Continue reading Ravat v Halliburton Manufacturing and Services Ltd: SC 8 Feb 2012
The defendant had been convicted, under regulations made under the Act, of smoking in a railway carriage. He sought to challenge the validity of the regulations themselves. He wanted to argue that the power to ban smoking on carriages did not . .
The plaintiffs were French producers of turkeys. They alleged that the Minister revoked their licence to import turkeys into this country by a decision that was ultra vires and motivated by a desire to assist British turkey producers, and that this . .
UNFAIR DISMISSAL
Reason for dismissal including substantial other reason
Reasonableness of dismissal
Unfair dismissal – reason for dismissal – fairness – Employments Rights Act 1996 section 98 (1), (2) and (4).
The . .
The Court was asked whether the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (‘the Commissioner’) owes a duty to her officers, in the conduct of proceedings against her based on their alleged misconduct, to take reasonable care to protect them from . .
The court considered whether a power of appeal to the existed.
Held: A power did exist under FETO, and the CANI having mistakenly excluded a power to appeal the Supreme Court could nevertheless hear it. Both appeals were allowed. . .
Appeal aganst refusal to extend time for filing unfair dismisal claim. . .
Part-time workers claimed that they had been unlawfully excluded from occupational pension schemes because membership was dependent on an employee working a minimum number of hours per week and that that was discriminatory because a considerably . .
The claimant complained that after alleging unlawful interception of his communications, the hearing before the Investigatory Powers Tribunal was not attended by appropriate safeguards. He had been a campaigner against police abuse. His requests to . .
When considering whether an unfair dismissal claimant was an employee, the tribunal should first establish as a fact the terms of the agreement and then consider whether any of the terms were inherently inconsistent with the existence of a contract . .
EAT The Tribunal was asked whether the claimant was a worker within the meaning of the Regulations and so entitled to their protection in receiving holiday pay.
Held: The appropriate classification of a . .
The claimants faxed on the evening to the employers an acceptance of the employer’s repudiation of their contracts. The claim was not presented to the tribunal until the same day of the month three months later.
Held: The claim was out of . .
The claimant had presented his unfair dismissal claim 88 seconds late. He appealed against refusal of jurisdiction by the Employent tribunal and the EAT.
Held: Leave was refused. The tribunal had given proper consideration to the question of . .
A solicitor had failed to register an option as a land charge over property. The court was asked what steps should have been taken by a solicitor in the conduct of a claim: ‘Mr Harman [leading counsel for the plaintiff] sought to rely upon the fact . .
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
EAT CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT – Damages for breach of contract The Tribunal awarded to the unfairly dismissed Claimant compensation for failure to pay any money to her during a 4 week notice period. The award was made under sections 86 to 88 of the ERA 1996. However the statutory minimum period of notice under section … Continue reading Milson v Hope: EAT 7 Mar 2013
Construction of compromise agreement. Citations: [2005] EWCA Civ 532, [2005] ICR 1260, [2005] IRLR 552 Links: Bailii Statutes: Employment Rights Act 1996 8203 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Employment Updated: 01 September 2022; Ref: scu.224519
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL: Compensation The Employment Tribunal found the Respondent unfairly dismissed the Claimant for raising a question about her statutory rights. She had been employed for 10 weeks and was entitled to one month’s notice. It awarded compensation effectively of 7 weeks’ pay. It found she would have been dismissed within that time in … Continue reading Ward v Ashkenazi: EAT 22 Mar 2010
The claimant had been dismissed shortly after becoming unable to work. She sought payment of her normal salary during the period of notice saying this was established good practice. Held: ‘We are put in the invidious position of being bound by a Court of Appeal decision which seems to the majority to conflict with a … Continue reading Langley and Another v Burso: EAT 3 Mar 2006
EAT Where employees are dismissed for refusal to sign a new contract containing proposed covenants in restraint of trade, the test is no different from that in respect of dismissal for refusing to sign a fresh contract in any other case, namely that, in respect of the proposed terms said to be unreasonable, it is … Continue reading Willow Oak Developments Ltd T/A Windsor Recruitment v Silverwood and others: EAT 5 Oct 2005
EAT Contract of Employment : Itemised Pay Statement – Where a payment by way of salary or wages for a period is reduced by the recovery of an overpayment in a previous period, that reduction is a ‘deduction’ for the purposes of section 8 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The deduction and its purpose … Continue reading Ridge v Her Majesty’s Land Registry: EAT 23 Sep 2014
The Hospital Medical Group argued that Dr Westwood was in business on his own account as a doctor, in which he had three customers, the NHS for his services as a general practitioner, the Albany Clinic for whom he did transgender work, and the . .
UNFAIR DISMISSAL; Reason for dismissal; band of reasonable responses; investigation. In a claim of unfair dismissal, the reason for dismissal relied upon by the employer in terms of section 98 of the Employment Rights Act, 1996 ‘(ERA’) was ‘conduct’. The evidence suggested that the employer had considered a range of matters all of which related … Continue reading Tesco Stores Ltd v S (Unfair Dismissal): EAT 1 Apr 2021
The Claimant, who was disabled within the meaning of the Equality Act 2010, was dismissed by the Respondent whilst on sickness absence. An Employment Tribunal found that the Claimant had been unfairly dismissed, contrary to the provisions of the Employment Rights Act 1996. The Tribunal also upheld the Claimant’s claim that her dismissal constituted disability … Continue reading Department of Work and Pensions v Boyers (Disability Discrimination): EAT 24 Jun 2020
EAT Rights On InsolvencyTwo separate Employment Tribunals decided that Claimants who had been employed (without knowing it) by a company which had entered a CVA were entitled to claim arrears of pay and holiday pay from the National Insurance Fund when subsequently the company went into liquidation. In each case, the reasoning was flawed: the … Continue reading Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills v Mcdonagh and Others: EAT 14 Feb 2013
EAT Rights On Insolvency – Two separate Employment Tribunals decided that Claimants who had been employed (without knowing it) by a company which had entered a CVA were entitled to claim arrears of pay and holiday pay from the National Insurance Fund when subsequently the company went into liquidation. In each case, the reasoning was … Continue reading Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills v Pengelly and Another: EAT 14 Feb 2013
The process of the company making the claimant redundant had been declared a sham. The company appealed against a decision that even had the correct procedures been followed, the decision would have been the same. The tribunal said that insufficient evidence had been brought to support such an assertion. Held: The appeal was dismissed. The … Continue reading Strand Transport Services Ltd v Whitworth: CA 6 Aug 2009
Employee to show company insolvent to claim EAT Insolvent Employer – The onus is on the applicant seeking payment for lost wages from the Secretary of state to establish that the employer company is insolvent. There must be proof of the occurring of an event falling within section 183(3) EAT Insolvency – (no sub-topic) Judges: … Continue reading The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Walden, Kealfreight Ltd: EAT 22 Jul 1999
There is no rule of law, to suggest that a sole director and owner of majority of shareholding, could not be an employee of that company, and be entitled to a redundancy payment on the liquidation of the company. ‘If the tribunal considers that the contract is not a sham, it is likely to wish … Continue reading Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Bottrill: CA 12 Feb 1999
The Employment Tribunal found that the Claimant made protected disclosures in respect of the introduction of a new rota system, which he reasonably believed posed a danger to the health and safety of patients, and to be made in the public interest. Subsequent to this, concerns raised by colleagues about his alleged conduct were referred … Continue reading Chatterjee v Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Trust (Victimisation Discrimination – Protected Disclosure): EAT 23 Sep 2019
The Claimant was employed by the Respondent as a cleaner. He is a national of Guinea Bissau but married to an EEA national exercising Treaty rights in the UK. That being so, the Tribunal correctly found that the Respondent was not at any risk in continuing to employ him after his residence permit expired. However, … Continue reading Sanha v Facilicom Cleaning Services Ltd (Unfair Dismissal): EAT 25 Feb 2020
Unfair dismissal – automatically unfair dismissal – section 100 Employment Rights Act 1996 The Claimant was a bus operator, operating out of the Putney bus garage, who claimed he had suffered detriment and automatic unfair dismissal on health and safety grounds under Sections 44 and 100 Employment Rights Act 1996 (‘the ERA’). These claims were … Continue reading Castano v London General Transport Services Ltd (Victimisation Detriment Health and Safety): EAT 29 Oct 2019
EAT Four employees successfully established before the Employment Tribunal that they had been unfairly dismissed for redundancy. The Tribunal found that there had been procedural defects. In particular the assessments in the redundancy exercise had been inadequate and subjective. The Tribunal considered whether the dismissals were fair under section 98A(2) of the Employment Rights Act … Continue reading Software 2000 Ltd v Andrews etc: EAT 17 Jan 2007
Appeal against refusal by the Employment Judge to strike out Dr Armes’ claims under sections 47B, 103A and 100(1)(c) Employment Rights Act 1996. The application to strike out was made on the basis that Dr Armes had no reasonable prospect of establishing that his pleaded disclosures were ‘qualifying disclosures’ within the meaning of section 43B(1), … Continue reading Twist DX Ltd and Others v Armes and Others (Whisleblowing, Protected Disclosures): EAT 23 Oct 2020
Lord Johnston considered the approach to be taken under section 98A: ‘In seeking to resolve this matter, it is necessary to make two observations of a general nature. In the first place, when an industrial tribunal is addressing the question in the context of remedy, against a background of procedural unfairness, whether a fair procedure … Continue reading Fisher v California Cake and Cookie Co: 1997
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio A claim was made for the price of goods which the plaintiff sold to the defendant in Dunkirk, knowing that the defendant’s purpose was to smuggle the goods into England. The plaintiff was met with a defence of illegality. Held: The defence failed. Knowledge on the part of the … Continue reading Holman v Johnson: 5 Jul 1775
The deceased’s adult son sought provision from the intestate estate. The sole beneficiary under the rules was the plaintiff’s mother. The estate was modest; the intestate’s interest in his house (he had been living there with the plaintiff). The widow was found to have a one third interest in it. The judge took the disposable … Continue reading In Re Coventry (deceased): CA 3 Jan 1979
UNFAIR DISMISSAL WHISTLEBLOWING, PROTECTED DISCLOSURES CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT The employment tribunal found that the Claimant had been unfairly dismissed, contrary to section 94 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (‘the ERA’), and wrongfully dismissed, but had not been automatically unfairly dismissed, contrary to section 103A of the ERA. On the Respondent employer’s appeal from the … Continue reading University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust v Reuser (Unfair Dismissal – Whistleblowing, Protected Disclosures): EAT 1 May 2020
The employer appealed findings of constructive dismissal after two of its immigration officers had refused to be moved under mobility clauses in their contracts, rather than be made redundant. Held: The appeal succeeded. The question was not the Home Office’s motive for its change of mind, but whether it was legally entitled to invoke the … Continue reading Home Office v Evans and Laidlaw: CA 2 Nov 2007
There was a claim for damages in respect of psychiatric injury said to result from a breach of the implied term of trust and confidence, which was asserted to be recoverable notwithstanding Johnson, on the basis that the acts of the employer complained of could be severed from the employer’s conduct leading to the dismissal, … Continue reading Eastwood v Magnox Electric plc: CA 2002
EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS – Working outside the jurisdiction WORKING TIME REGULATIONS – Holiday pay The approach to determining whether an employee of British company who works and lives abroad falls within the territorial scope of the Employment Rights Act 1996 section 94(1) has been developed since Lawson v Serco Ltd [2006] ICR 250. The question … Continue reading Dhunna v Creditsights Ltd: EAT 3 Apr 2013
EAT JURISDICTIONAL POINTS – Extension of time: reasonably practicableWhere a Claimant has retained a solicitor to act for him and failed to meet the deadline for presenting a complaint of unfair dismissal to an Employment Tribunal, the adviser’s fault will defeat any attempt to argue that it was not reasonably practicable to make a timely … Continue reading El-Kholy v Rentokil Initial Facilities Services (UK) Ltd: EAT 21 Mar 2013
EAT Trade Union Rights : Interim Relief The Claimant’s claim was brought for unfair dismissal contrary to s152(1)(b) TULR(C)A 1992 (trade union activity) and Schedule A1 para 161(2)(a) (acting to secure union recognition). An application for interim relief under s161 TULR(C)A 1992 and s128 ERA 1996 was supported by requisite certificates by TU officials.Relief granted … Continue reading London City Airport Ltd v Chacko: EAT 22 Mar 2013
The claimant school teacher had been dismissed, after a finding that she had assaulted a pupil. She denied the assualt. Held: The School’s appeal against the decision of the EAT to re-instate the claim of unfair dismissal succeeded. The EAT had wrongly substituted its won veiw of the facts for that of the Tribunal. However … Continue reading Clarence High School and Another v Boardman: CA 15 Mar 2013
EAT VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Protected disclosureWhether Claimant may rely on post-termination protected disclosure in ‘whistleblowing’ claim under s.47B Employment Rights Act 1996. He can. Appeal allowed against Employment Tribunal Judgment to the contrary. Judges: Peter Clark J Citations: [2013] UKEAT 0407 – 12 – 2501 Links: Bailii Statutes: Employment Rights Act 1996 47B Jurisdiction: England … Continue reading Onyango v Berkeley (T/A Berkeley Solicitors): EAT 25 Jan 2013
EAT REDUNDANCY PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Bias, misconduct and procedural irregularity The Claimant worked as an Accountant in the Respondent’s Children and Families Directorate. The Employment Tribunal was correct to find that a redundancy situation was created when the Respondent reorganised the Directorate and introduced requirement for skills the Claimant was not considered to have. … Continue reading Barot v London Borough of Brent: EAT 17 Jan 2013
The claimant succeeded in her claim for unfair dismissal, but now appealed against the reversal of the decision by the EAT. She had been dismissed for incapability to which she had contributed by her conduct. She had refused a move to another bank of the branch which would upset her child care arrangements. She was … Continue reading McAdie v Royal Bank of Scotland: CA 31 Jul 2007
The bank claimed that it had been defrauded, and that since an employee of the defendant had taken part in the fraud the defendant was had vicarious liability for his participation even though they knew nothing of it. Held: Where A becomes liable to B as a joint tortfeasor with C in the tort of … Continue reading Generale Bank Nederland Nv (Formerly Credit Lyonnais Bank Nederland Nv) v Export Credit Guarantee Department: CA 23 Jul 1997
Practice and Procedure The claim form which alleged unfair dismissal contained an indication of a claim of unfair dismissal pursuant to section 103A Employment Rights Act 1996 (ERA). The strike out was made on the basis that the Appellant had insufficient continuity of employment to pursue an unfair dismissal claim. This was correct in respect … Continue reading Stubbs v Grafters Ltd: EAT 31 May 2022
EAT UNLAWFUL DEDUCTION FROM WAGESThe Claimants claimed that the Respondent had wrongly evaluated their jobs under the applicable job evaluation scheme. They contended that properly evaluated they would have been awarded higher scores entitling them to a higher Grade, (Grade 7 or 8). They brought claims for deduction from wages under the Employment Rights Act … Continue reading Kingston Upon Hull City Council v Schofield and Others: EAT 6 Nov 2012
The employee appealed against a decision rejecting her claim that the employer had made an unlawful deduction from her salary. Judges: Browne-Wilkinson J Citations: [2007] EWCA Civ 761, [2007] IRLR 777, [2007] ICR 167 Links: Bailii Statutes: Employment Rights Act 1996 13 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Jones v Associated Tunnelling Co Ltd … Continue reading Luke v Stoke-On-Trent City Council: CA 24 Jul 2007
Appeal against dismissal of claim of unauthorised deduction from wages. Judges: Sir Igor Judge P, Moore-Bick LJ, Sir Peter Gibson Citations: [2007] EWCA Civ 714 Links: Bailii Statutes: Employment Rights Act 1996 13 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Appeal from – Camden Primary Care Trust v Atchoe EAT 22-Aug-2006 EAT Unlawful Deduction from Wages – … Continue reading Camden Primary Care Trust v Atchoe: CA 9 May 2007
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Time for appealingJURISDICTIONAL POINTS – Excluded employmentsThe Claimant, a former soldier, resigned and claimed constructive unfair dismissal and breach of contract in the Employment Tribunal. It declined jurisdiction: Employment Rights Act 1996 ss191-2 disapply the Act to the armed forces. The Claimant received clear legal advice to that effect but … Continue reading Booley v British Army Mod: EAT 19 Jul 2012
EAT VICTIMISATION DISCRIMINATION – Protected disclosureTribunal entitled to decide on the facts that the employee’s belief that his disclosure tended to show matters of the kind specified under section 43B (1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996 was not reasonable. Judges: Underhill P J Citations: [2010] UKEAT 0167 – 10 – 2406 Links: Bailii Statutes: … Continue reading Easwaran v St George’s University of London: EAT 24 Jun 2010
Casual workers employed under ‘nil hours’ relationship still had a contract of employment and the appropriate and associated rights. A court was fully able to determine the terms of the contract. Citations: Times 02-Apr-1998, Gazette 13-May-1998, [1997] EWCA Civ 871, [1999] ICR 1226, [1998] EWCA Civ 558, [2000] IRLR 43 Statutes: Employment Protection (Consolidation) Act … Continue reading Carmichael and Lesse v National Power Plc: CA 29 Jan 1997
EAT Practice and Procedure – Chairman alone. Whether owner of 50% of shares in company and director was employee and entitled to payment of arrears of pay on its insolvency. Judges: The Honourable Mr Justice Elias (President) Citations: [2006] UKEAT 0337 – 06 – 2510, UKEAT/0337/06, [2007] ICR 264 Links: Bailii, EAT Statutes: Employment Rights … Continue reading Gladwell v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry: EAT 25 Oct 2006
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL Employment Rights Act 1996, section 98(4) Fairness of dismissal Before the Employment Tribunal it was agreed that the Claimant was dismissed for the potentially fair reason of redundancy. It was disputed that the test of fairness was satisfied. The Claimant alleged that he was the highest scoring applicant for a new post, … Continue reading Cumbria Partnership NHS Foundation Trust v Steel: EAT 17 May 2012
The employee had patented in the US a trading system he invented whilst employed by the defendant, who now sought ownership. He appealed a finding that the inventions had been made during the normal course of his employment. The employment contract provided: ‘All trade secrets, inventions, written documents, and other confidential information developed or created … Continue reading Liffe Administration and Management v Pinkava and Another: CA 15 Mar 2007
The claimant had been chief executive and a director of the respondent for many years, but was dismissed upon it being taken over. His contract of employment as chief executive provided that it was to be coterminous with his appointment as director. Held: The tribunal were not wrong in law in identifying the reason and … Continue reading Kenneth Cobley v Forward Technology Industries Plc: CA 14 May 2003
Claim for unlawful deduction from wages. Citations: [2007] EWCA Civ 19, [2007] IRLR 440, [2007] ICR 983 Links: Bailii Statutes: Employment Rights Act 1996 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Employment Updated: 31 October 2022; Ref: scu.248014
The claimant sought damages for the consequences of having been suspended from work as a teacher. He later recovered damages for unfair dismissal, and the court had struck out his claim for damages over and above those already awarded. Held: There is no absolute bar against a claim for damages not covered by the Employment … Continue reading McCabe v Cornwall County Council, The Governing Body of Mounts Bay School: CA 23 Dec 2002
A Union’s immunity from action was not lost where employees who had joined the company after the strike ballot had been completed, were encouraged by the union to join in the strike. The constituency defined in section 227(1) must include all members whom it is reasonable for the union to believe will be induced to … Continue reading London Underground Ltd v National Union of Railwaymen, Maritime and Transport Workers (NURMT): CA 9 Oct 1995
The claimant appealed the refusal of her claim for a finding that her dismissal was automatically unfair. She had been employed for less than a year, and had taken several absences to care for her child. She claimed protection saying that her absences had been ‘dependants leave’. Held: When considering such a claim, the tribunal … Continue reading Qua v John Ford Morrison (Solicitors): EAT 14 Jan 2003
A Church of England Assistant Curate is not an employee, but rather a holder of an ecclesiastical office. There is a presumption that ministers of religion were office-holders who did not serve under a contract of employment. Accordingly he is not entitled to claim to have been unfairly dismissed under the legislation. Mummery LJ said: … Continue reading Reverend Doctor A B Coker v Diocese of Southwark; Bishop of Southwark and Diocesan Board of Finance: CA 11 Jul 1997
The claimant challenged dismissal of his claim of having suffered an unfair detriment having made a disclosure with regard to his employers. The employers had said that as a constable, his employment was outside the scope of the Act, and the decision of the Police disciplinary Board could not found his claim. Held: the paragraph … Continue reading Lake v British Transport Police: CA 5 May 2007
Practice and Procedure – Striking Out of Claims PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Imposition of Deposit PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Amendment of Notice of Appeal 1. The Employment Tribunal was correct to refuse to strike out the claim of unfair dismissal under s.104 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It was entitled to make a deposit … Continue reading Adams v Kingdom Services Group Ltd: EAT 11 Dec 2019
Jurisdictional Points – Worker, Employee or Neither The employment tribunal had properly found that the claimant was a ‘worker’ but not an ’employee’ within section 230 of the Employment Rights Act 1996. There was no error of law or wrong approach to that issue. The tribunal had erred in deciding that the claimant was not … Continue reading Augustine v Econnect Cars Ltd: EAT 20 Dec 2019
Practice and Procedure – Postponement or Stay – Transfer/Hearing Together An employment judge had erred in law in deciding that he lacked jurisdiction to determine a claim under the Third Parties (Rights Against Insurers) Act 2010 (the 2010 Act) arising between the claimant and the insurer of the insolvent first respondent. The employment tribunal was … Continue reading Watson v Hemingway Design Ltd and Others: EAT 16 Dec 2019
Victimisation Discrimination – Protected Disclosure – Interim Relief UNFAIR DISMISSAL The Claimant applied for interim relief pursuant to s.128 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 following the termination of his contract allegedly because he had made protected disclosures. The Respondent contended that there was no entitlement to make such an application as the Claimant was … Continue reading Hancock v Ter-Berg and Another: EAT 25 Jul 2019
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSAL Contributory fault Polkey deduction Employee dismissed following disciplinary proceedings for: (1) misconduct towards other staff; (2) misconduct in attitude to directors; and (3) disclosure of information from staff payroll (3 instances). Employment Tribunal reject claims of wrongful and unfair dismissal but find dismissal ‘automatically unfair’ because one instance of disclosure was a … Continue reading Kaltz Ltd v Hamer: EAT 24 Feb 2012
EAT Redundancy : Suitable Alternative Employment – Did the Employment Tribunal err in law in concluding that the Appellant had unreasonably refused an offer of alternative employment for her own reasons, when it had correctly concluded that the offer was an offer of suitable employment which a reasonable employee could have accepted? Judges: Wilkie J … Continue reading Readman v Devon Primary Care Trust: EAT 1 Dec 2011
EAT UNFAIR DISMISSALSEX DISCRIMINATION – ComparisonUnfair dismissal – misconduct. Claimant assaulted girlfriend (also RBS employee) in circumstances where he alleged he had been provoked by her having slapped him. Sex discrimination. Circumstances in which Employment Tribunal were held to have erred in requiring misconduct, for the purposes of s.98(2) of the Employment Rights Act 1996, … Continue reading Royal Bank of Scotland v Donaghay: EAT 11 Nov 2011
The claimant had been an ordained minister in the church. She sought to claim unfair dismissal. The Conference replied that she was not an employee entitled to make such a claim. Held: The claimant was an employee. Judges: Maurice Kay VP, Longmore LJJ, Sir David Keene Citations: [2011] EWCA Civ 1581, [2012] 2 WLR 1119, … Continue reading The President of The Methodist Conference v Preston: CA 20 Dec 2011
The appellant’s application for full registration as a qualified medical practitioner had been refused by the GMC after a five-year maximum period of limited registration. His application for full registration in accordance with section 25 of the Medical Act 1983 was refused by the GMC. He then applied to the Review Board for Overseas Qualified … Continue reading Khan v General Medical Council: CA 11 Apr 1994
